VulnerabilityPublished 18 Sep 2026Updated 24 Sep 2026

CVE-2026-61822: pgpartman pg_partman · Improper Check or Handling of Exceptional Conditions

Affects pgpartman pg_partmanSource CVE Database V5

Compare

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 6.5 Medium : upgrade to 5.5.0 when convenient.

Data as of 2 Nov 2026, 22:58 UTC

CVSS 3.1 base score

6.5Medium

How severe the flaw is on the 0–10 CVSS scale.

EPSS: 0.5% chance of exploitation in 30 days – higher than 44% of CVEsExploit Prediction Scoring System: the likelihood attackers will use this flaw soon.
Patch: Available – fixed in 5.5.0

CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H

Attack Vector: Network
Attack Complexity: Low
Privileges Required: Low
User Interaction: None
Scope: Unchanged
Confidentiality: None
Integrity: None
Availability: High

Bold values are the worst case: easiest to exploit or largest impact.

Attack Vector: Network: The vulnerable component is bound to the network stack and the set of possible attackers extends beyond the other options listed, up to and including the entire Internet. Such a vulnerability is often termed 'remotely exploitable' and can be thought of as an attack being exploitable at the protocol level one or more network hops away (e.g., across one or more routers).
Attack Complexity: Low: Specialized access conditions or extenuating circumstances do not exist. An attacker can expect repeatable success against the vulnerable component.
Privileges Required: Low: The attacker is authorized with (i.e., requires) privileges that provide basic user capabilities that could normally affect only settings and files owned by a user. Alternatively, an attacker with Low privileges may have the ability to cause an impact only to non-sensitive resources.
User Interaction: None: The vulnerable system can be exploited without any interaction from any user.
Scope: Unchanged: An exploited vulnerability can only affect resources managed by the same security authority. In this case, the vulnerable component and the impacted component are either the same, or both are managed by the same security authority.
Confidentiality: None: There is no loss of confidentiality within the impacted component.
Integrity: None: There is no loss of integrity within the impacted component.
Availability: High: There is total loss of availability, resulting in the attacker being able to fully deny access to resources in the impacted component; this loss is either sustained (while the attacker continues to deliver the attack) or persistent (the condition persists even after the attack has completed). Alternatively, the attacker has the ability to deny some availability, but the loss of availability presents a direct, serious consequence to the impacted component (e.g., the attacker cannot disrupt existing connections, but can prevent new connections; the attacker can repeatedly exploit a vulnerability that, in each instance of a successful attack, leaks a only small amount of memory, but after repeated exploitation causes a service to become completely unavailable).

Definitions: FIRST CVSS v3.1 specification.

Exploitation evidence

Disclosed: evidence found.
CVE published 18 Sep 2026
Detectable: no evidence on record.
No public nuclei template indexed
Weaponized: no evidence on record.
No public exploit code indexed in Metasploit or Exploit-DB
Exploited in the wildExploited: no evidence on record.
Not in CISA KEV and no source reports exploitation
Observed by OffSeq MirageSeen by Mirage: no evidence on record.
No attack traffic recorded by OffSeq Mirage sensors

A missing step is not evidence of safety. Sources: cve.org (opens in a new tab), the Metasploit, Exploit-DB and nuclei-templates index as of 2 Nov 2026.

Disclosed: The CVE record is public on cve.org. Its publication is t = 0.
Detectable: A public nuclei template can find exposed instances, for defenders and attackers alike.
Weaponized: A Metasploit exploit module or Exploit-DB entry exists (Metasploit scanner modules do not count), or CISA SSVC or the CVSS exploit maturity reports a public proof of concept.
Exploited in the wild: CISA KEV lists it, CISA SSVC rates exploitation active, or a source reports attacks.
Observed by OffSeq Mirage: OffSeq Mirage honeypot sensors recorded attack traffic for this CVE, or found exposed hosts without attack traffic.

Moments are spaced evenly, not to scale; a dashed line marks a gap of six months or more. Deltas count from t = 0. Sources that give only a date (CISA KEV, Exploit-DB, or a time of exactly 00:00Z) read “same day” rather than hours. Metasploit modules carry the flaw’s disclosure date, not their release date, and nuclei templates carry no date, so both appear above but not on the timeline.

What to do

Upgrade pg_partman and pgpartman/pg_partman to 5.5.0.

Affected software

Product	Affected	Fixed in
pgpartmanpg_partman	Affected <5.5.0	Fixed in 5.5.0
GitHubpgpartman/pg_partman`pkg:github/pgpartman/pg_partman`Other threats	Affected <5.5.0	Fixed in 5.5.0

Check your own hosts for these packages with threat-finder (opens in a new tab), our free open-source scanner.

AI-suggested

Upgrade pg_partman to version 5.5.0 or later, where this issue is fixed. No other mitigations are indicated by the vendor advisory.

Description

pg_partman is a PostgreSQL extension that manages partitioned tables by time or ID. Prior to 5.5.0, run_maintenance() handles exceptions outside the loop that processes rows from part_config, so an exception for one partition set immediately terminates the loop and skips every later set. A role with partman_user access can insert or update a row that reliably fails and assign it a low maintenance_order value so it is processed before legitimate rows. Repeated maintenance ticks then abort before legitimate partition sets are maintained, causing database-wide loss of automated partition maintenance. This issue is fixed in version 5.5.0.

Impact

The vulnerability results in denial of service of automated partition maintenance in PostgreSQL databases using pg_partman. While it does not impact confidentiality or integrity, it causes availability issues by preventing legitimate partition maintenance tasks from completing, potentially leading to operational disruptions in database management.

Summary

The vulnerability arises from improper exception handling in pg_partman's run_maintenance() function before version 5.5.0. Exceptions triggered by a maliciously crafted row cause the maintenance loop to abort early, skipping maintenance of later partition sets. An attacker with partman_user privileges can exploit this by inserting or updating a row with a low maintenance_order that fails reliably, causing repeated maintenance ticks to abort before legitimate partitions are maintained. This leads to a denial of service condition affecting automated partition maintenance. The flaw is addressed in pg_partman version 5.5.0.

CWE-703Improper Check or Handling of Exceptional Conditions (opens in a new tab)
Pillar weaknessOWASP Top 10 A10:2025: Mishandling of Exceptional Conditions (opens in a new tab)
The product does not properly anticipate or handle exceptional conditions that rarely occur during normal operation of the product.
MITRE discourages mapping vulnerabilities to this broad entry; the root cause is usually a more specific weakness.
OWASP Cheat Sheets
Logging (opens in a new tab)
Error Handling (opens in a new tab)
From MITRE CWE, MITRE CAPEC and OWASP (Top 10, OpenCRE).

References

Community reviews

Loading reviews…

Exploitation evidence

What to do

Affected software

Description

AI analysisMachine-generated, updated 26 Sep 2026, 03:13 UTC

WeaknessesCWE-703

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats